A New Year’s Proposal For Bruno Grandi

(A)rtistry Score = 0.5 points. Every routine is graded from 0.0 to 0.50 based on its overall artistic impression. Attention is given to body alignment, presentation, style, and choreography.

(B)onus Score = 0.5 points. Every routine can be given up to 0.50 additional “bonus” points. Consideration is given to truly exceptional artistry, risk, originality, virtuosity, and amplitude. Judges can award 0.1 for a single reason and must briefly specify the reasons for the points given with phrases like “exceptional choreography,” “risky skill (specify the skill),” “innovative skill (specify the skill),” “extraordinary toepoint,” “extreme height on release skills,” etc.

(D)ifficulty Score = 3 points. Count the best 7 elements. Give 0.0 for A’s, 0.1 for B’s, 0.2 for C’s, 0.4 for D’s, 0.6 for E’s, 0.8 for F’s, 1.0 for G’s. Additional connection points can be awarded in this category as well (specified for each event).

(E)xecution Score = 5 points. Total of 10 elements, worth 0.5 of execution for each. This means a routine with fewer than 10 total elements will need to have 0.5 taken from this category for each missing element. Note that only 7 skills are counted in the difficulty category above, but 10 total are required to receive all 5 points for execution. Deductions are simply graded from 0.0 (no deduction) –-> 0.50 (a fall OR multiple deductions on a single skill adding to at least 0.50), in increments of 0.05.This means deductions of 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.4, 0.45, and 0.5 can be taken on each skill. There is no need to specify every single possible deduction in the rules; each skill is simply described as being done perfectly in the code of points, and gymnastics sense is used to grade all deviations from perfection within the range of 0.0 to 0.50.

10 Points Total

Below is another similar suggested code of points, using the pneumonic “CODE.” The only difference is that the “A” and “B” scores from above are combined into a single “O” (“Other”) score:

(O)ther Score = 1 point. This is an entirely subjective category graded from 0.0 to 1.0. Consideration is given to artistry, originality, risk, virtuosity, and amplitude. Judges can award up to 0.2 for a single reason and must briefly specify the reasons for the points given with phrases like “exceptional choreography,” “risky skill (specify the skill),” “innovative skill (specify the skill), ” “extraordinary toepoint,” “extreme height on release skills,” etc.

(D)ifficulty Score = 3 points. Count the best 7 elements. Give 0.0 for A’s, 0.1 for B’s, 0.2 for C’s, 0.4 for D’s, 0.6 for E’s, 0.8 for F’s, 1.0 for G’s. Additional connection points can be awarded in this category as well (specified for each event).

(E)xecution Score = 5 points. Total of 10 elements, worth 0.5 of execution for each. This means a routine with fewer than 10 total elements will need to have 0.5 taken from this category for each missing element. Note that only 7 skills are counted in the difficulty category above, but 10 total are required to receive all 5 points for execution. Deductions are simply graded from 0.0 (no deduction) –-> 0.50 (a fall OR multiple deductions on a single skill adding to at least 0.50), in increments of 0.05.This means deductions of 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.4, 0.45, and 0.5 can be taken on each skill. There is no need to specify every single possible deduction in the rules; each skill is simply described as being done perfectly in the code of points, and gymnastics sense is used to grade all deviations from perfection within the range of 0.0 to 0.50.

10 Points Total

These are two of the simplest and most straight forward codes of points I could come up with that would incorporate the intentions of the current code of points (true separation of difficulty and execution), yet would reduce the length of routines, bring back the perfect ten, and even more importantly, bring back the desperately missed subjective component that encourages emphasis on artistry and allows for truly special routines to be appropriately rewarded. The math would be very basic, and using a pneumonic would allow for ease of understanding amongst gymnasts, coaches, judges, and even fans. I would also suggest that all scores in each category be posted after each routine for the audience to see.

Could gymnastics judging become as simple as A-B-C-D-E? Could creating an “O” score change the sport back to the one we all miss?

I don’t understand the difficulty score. If they count the best seven elements with those point values and then give more points for connections, the sum could easily be more than 3 points. Do you want to cap it at three points?

For the execution part, what happens if a gymnast does more than 10 elements (as most do on bars and floor)? Do they simply count the ten most well-executed ones? That could mean that someone could fall and still get a 10.

Anna – good questions. Yes, I intended for the difficulty to be capped at 3.0 points. And as for the execution, you couldn’t make a mistake and still get a 10; 5.0 points is simply where you “start” from as long as you have at least 10 elements. All execution errors would still be taken from that, regardless of where they occur.